| The attributive argumentation of case facts is the soul of argumentation in judicial adjudication. Its main purposes are to break the barrier between law and fact and to answer the difficult argumentation question of whether case facts can be attributed to constitutive requirement of legal rules. At present, both the subsumtion model and the equalization model have insurmountable drawbacks as argumentation model of attribution. Because of this, we should draw on the advantages of both models, reconstruct an argumentation model of attribution on the basis of generally acknowledged truth, establish the progressive conforming model of fact/value argumentation as attributing argumentation of case facts and the corresponding argumentative patterns, rules and principles. The progressive conforming model can be specifically expressed as the followings:if the facts of a pending case can be proved to be in conformity with the factual characteristics of constitutive requirement, they should be attributed to constitutive requirement without value argument; if the conformity of the factual characteristics cannot be proved, then it is necessary to consider the question of whether the value judgment of the case facts conforms to the value of legal rules. If answer is yes, the case facts should be attributed to constitutive requirement; and if answer is no, the case facts should not be attributed to constitutive requirement. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号